Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30670529›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Transarticular tibiotalocalcaneal nailing versus open reduction and internal fixation for treatment of the elderly ankle fracture: protocol for a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial.

Paul Tuckett, Matthew Hope, Kevin Tetsworth, Jerry Van De Pol, Catherine McDougall

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Paul TuckettDepartment of Orthopaedics, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7793-8492
Matthew HopeDepartment of Orthopaedics, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Kevin TetsworthDepartment of Orthopaedics, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Jerry Van De PolDepartment of Orthopaedics, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Catherine McDougallDepartment of Orthopaedics, The Prince Charles Hospital, Chermside, Queensland, Australia.
Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital · AUPrince Charles Hospital · AUPrincess Alexandra Hospital · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAnkle fractures are common in the elderly population. Surgical fixation is technically challenging and often results in complications due to high rates of osteoporosis and vascular disease. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) often requires prolonged periods of non-weight bearing increasing the risks of complications. Tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing has been suggested as an alternative to ORIF which allows immediate weight bearing, and is suggested to result in fewer complications. This study aims to compare the two surgical techniques in the elderly population with ankle fractures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial comparing ORIF to TTC nailing in 110 patients with ankle fractures aged 50 or above with a Charlson Comorbidity Index of greater than or equal to four. Participants and assessors will not be blinded to intervention. The primary outcome measure will be overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes include length of hospital stay, mobility at discharge, discharge destination, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot score, the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score, mortality rate, rate of secondary surgical interventions and number of blood transfusions required postoperatively. Our null hypothesis is that there is no clinically significant difference in the primary outcome measure between the two treatment groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by Metro South Hospital and Health Services Human Research Ethics Committee (EC00167) (reference number HREC/17/QPAH/351). DISCUSSION: Completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of TTC nailing versus ORIF in treatment of the elderly ankle fracture. If TTC nailing is found to result in superior outcomes, this trial has the capacity to change current clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12617001588381;Pre-results andU1111-1203-1704.

Indexed as

Ankle FracturesAnkle JointBone NailsFracture Fixation, IntramedullaryFracture HealingHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicOpen Fracture ReductionProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRange of Motion, ArticularTreatment Outcomeagedankle fracturesfracture fixationhindfoot nailopen reduction internal fixation

Identifiers

PMID30670529
PMCPMC6347874
OpenAlexW2911284790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.